01 / Executive brief
Executive summary
DuPont's chloride-route process for making titanium-dioxide pigment was not one secret blueprint. It was a body of plant design, flow sheets, specifications, and operating knowledge accumulated inside a tightly protected industrial system. Walter Liew assembled access to that system by recruiting retired DuPont engineers whose careers carried the process in documents and memory. S1 S2
Liew's companies entered contracts worth more than $20 million to provide chloride-process technology for Pangang projects in China without a DuPont license. Liew, Robert Maegerle, and USA Performance Technology were convicted on core trade-secret counts, and Liew and his company on economic espionage; however, the separate prosecution of the Pangang companies ended in a 2026 dismissal with prejudice and no corporate verdict. S1 S2 S3 S4
Titanium dioxide is a high-volume white pigment used in products including paints, plastics, and paper. The stolen asset was the protected chloride-route plant process for manufacturing it at scale. Contextual image.
ATGabdrahmanov · CC BY-SA 4.0 ↗02 / The vignette
What happened
Industrial knowledge walked out in people
The route to DuPont's process ran through experienced retirees. Liew retained former engineers, including Maegerle, who had spent years around DuPont's titanium-dioxide plants. The prosecution showed how post-employment consulting can reunite protected drawings and specifications with tacit knowledge held by specialists who know why a plant is designed the way it is. S1 S2
Consulting contracts packaged the transfer
Liew's U.S. business signed a multimillion-dollar Pangang contract in 2005 and a $17.8 million agreement for a Chongqing project in 2009. Trial evidence connected those projects to protected DuPont drawings, flow sheets, specifications, and process knowledge aimed at building or upgrading chloride-route facilities in China. S1 S2
The record has two different outcomes
A jury convicted Liew, Maegerle, and the U.S. consulting company in 2014; the core trade-secret and economic-espionage convictions survived appeal, and Liew was resentenced to 144 months. The Pangang entities require separate treatment: prosecutors dismissed their charges with prejudice during trial in July 2026. That dismissal is not a conviction, and this dossier does not present it as one. S1 S3 S4
03 / Anatomy
How access became transfer
This six-part framework asks the same questions of every file. Each stage carries its own evidence state; a listed stage can be alleged, inferred, interrupted, disputed, or not established. The structure does not manufacture a completed transfer or harm.
- 01
- 02
- 03
Acquisition assessed Adjudicated or admitted
Protected compilation assembled
Trial evidence tied protected drawings, flow sheets, specifications, and process knowledge to the consulting team's work. S1
- 04
- 05
Downstream use assessed Adjudicated or admitted
Plant projects advanced
The work was directed toward upgrading and building chloride-route titanium-dioxide facilities without DuPont licensing its protected process. S1
- 06
04 / Evidence boundary
What is established—and what is not
Established in the record
- The surviving convictions establish that Liew and his U.S. company attempted to obtain and convey protected DuPont process technology and intended to benefit a foreign instrumentality. S1 S3
- The record shows deliberate recruitment of former DuPont personnel and use of protected technical compilations rather than lawful independent development alone. S1 S2
- The Pangang companies were never convicted: their separate charges were dismissed with prejudice in July 2026. S4
Uncertain, limited, or unresolved
- The public dismissal did not adjudicate the Pangang companies' factual innocence or liability; it ended the prosecution without a verdict, so this file assigns them no criminal finding. S4
Subject response / procedural context
- Liew and USA Performance Technology challenged whether the material remained secret and whether the instructions permitted conviction without proof of a trade secret; the Ninth Circuit rejected the core challenges but reversed unrelated counts and required further proceedings. S1
- Pangang defended the corporate prosecution through trial; the Justice Department then voluntarily dismissed those charges with prejudice, foreclosing a later retrial on them. S4
05 / Sequence
Timeline
-
First Pangang contract
A Liew company signed a multimillion-dollar agreement for a chloride-process project. S1
-
Chongqing project contracted
USA Performance Technology signed a $17.8 million agreement for another chloride-route facility. S1
-
Core convictions upheld
The Ninth Circuit upheld the trade-secret and economic-espionage rulings while reversing separate obstruction and witness-tampering counts and remanding. S1
-
Liew resentenced
On remand, the district court imposed a 144-month prison term. S3
-
Pangang charges dismissed
After trial began, the government dismissed the charges against Pangang and its subsidiaries with prejudice. S4
06 / People and institutions
Who appears in the public record
Walter Liew
Owner and president of USA Performance Technology S1 S2 S3 S4
Outcome: Convicted of economic-espionage and trade-secret offenses; resentenced to 144 months after appeal S2
Walter Liew: Liew's surviving economic-espionage convictions required a jury finding that he intended or knew the conduct would benefit a foreign government, instrumentality, or agent. That finding does not convert the later-dismissed charges against Pangang into corporate convictions. S1 S2 S3 S4
Robert Maegerle
Retired DuPont engineer retained as a consultant S1 S2 S3 S4
Outcome: Convicted of trade-secret offenses; sentenced to 30 months S2
USA Performance Technology Inc.
Engineering company that contracted on Pangang titanium-dioxide projects S1 S2 S3 S4
Outcome: Convicted of economic-espionage and trade-secret offenses S2
USA Performance Technology Inc.: Liew's surviving economic-espionage convictions required a jury finding that he intended or knew the conduct would benefit a foreign government, instrumentality, or agent. That finding does not convert the later-dismissed charges against Pangang into corporate convictions. S1 S2 S3 S4
Pangang Group companies
Chinese state-owned project customers and separately charged corporate defendants S1 S2 S3 S4
Outcome: Charges dismissed with prejudice during trial in July 2026; no corporate conviction S2
Originator / affected institution
E. I. du Pont de Nemours and Company
Developer and owner of the protected chloride-route titanium-dioxide technology S1 S2 S3 S4
07 / Consequences
Documented, attributed, potential, and unknown consequences
The scheme converted decades of protected process development into a commercial engineering package sold through contracts exceeding $20 million. S1 S2
The district court's original sentence included $511,667.82 in restitution and $27.8 million in forfeiture; the custodial term was later reduced on remand. S2 S3
08 / Hindsight analysis
Where leadership could have seen risk
These are our analytic judgments based on the public record, not court findings. They are framed to improve controls without treating nationality as a risk factor.
Retirement did not end exposure
Former employees retained both documents and deep tacit knowledge. Offboarding, continuing confidentiality reminders, and post-employment conflict controls needed to match the asset's long useful life.
Know-how was valuable as a compilation
Individual facts could look familiar or public while the protected selection, sequence, and operating detail remained commercially decisive.
Commercial projects obscured provenance
Engineering contracts can make acquired capability look ordinary. Buyers, suppliers, and boards need a defensible provenance record for designs assembled from former-employer knowledge.
09 / Apply the lesson
Actions leaders can take
- companies
Extend crown-jewel offboarding
Inventory returned media, preserve access logs, issue tailored continuing-duty notices, and use counsel-approved follow-up when former insiders join a customer, consultant, or competitor project involving the same process.
- both
Protect compilations explicitly
Document why the combination of parameters, drawings, sequences, and troubleshooting knowledge is secret, valuable, and access-controlled even where individual elements are public.
- companies
Demand design provenance
Require project teams and acquired vendors to identify prior-employer inputs, licenses, clean-room boundaries, and independent-development records before sensitive technology is delivered.
10 / Source record
Sources
Links point to the public record reviewed for this file. Government releases can summarize court proceedings but remain government-authored sources; the source note identifies those limits.
- S1 adjudicative record court record
United States v. Liew, 856 F.3d 585 ↗
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · Published May 5, 2017 · Retrieved Aug 23, 2026
Locator: United States v. Liew, 856 F.3d 585 (9th Cir. 2017)
Published appellate opinion describing the evidence, affirming the core trade-secret and economic-espionage convictions, reversing separate counts, and remanding.
- S2 official summary government release
Walter Liew Sentenced to Fifteen Years in Prison for Economic Espionage ↗
U.S. Department of Justice · Published Jul 11, 2014 · Retrieved Aug 23, 2026
Original sentencing summary; the later appellate remand and resentencing are separately documented.
- S3 procedural record court record
United States v. Liew, Order Granting Motion to Reduce Sentence ↗
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California via FindLaw · Published Jun 15, 2020 · Retrieved Aug 23, 2026
Court order recounting the surviving convictions and 2018 resentencing to 144 months.
- S4 independent reporting reputable reporting
DOJ Drops Espionage Charges Against DuPont's Chinese Competitor ↗
Bloomberg Law · Published Jul 14, 2026 · Retrieved Aug 23, 2026
Current procedural reporting on the government's dismissal with prejudice during the Pangang trial.
12 / Reference
Cite this dossier
Use the permanent URL and review date below so readers can identify the version of the public-source record you consulted.
ChinaSteals. “Former DuPont insiders sold chloride-process trade secrets into a Chinese state-owned project.” CS-003. Published Aug 23, 2026; last reviewed Aug 25, 2026. https://chinasteals.com/cases/liew-maegerle-dupont-tio2/